People today look remarkably diverse on the outside. But how much of this diversity is genetically encoded? How deep are these differences between human groups? First, compared with many other mammalian species, humans are genetically far less diverse  a counterintuitive finding, given our large population and worldwide distribution. For example, the subspecies of the chimpanzee that lives just in central Africa, Pan troglodytes troglodytes, has higher levels of diversity than do humans globally, and the genetic differentiation between the western (P. t. verus) and central (P. t. troglodytes) subspecies of chimpanzees is much greater than that between human populations.

I've read at least one claim that there is less diversity in the entire human race than in a typical group of 40 African monkeys of the same species, although that sort of quote is the kind of thing which you'd never find when looking for it...

This lack of diversity is generally attributed to a population bottleneck of sorts which most scholars place around 45,000 years ago, some claiming there may have been as few as 50 modern humans on the planet at that time. Nonetheless, those claims generally assume some sort of a transition from "early modern humans(TM)" (meaning gracile hominids) to Cro Magnon humans at that time.

Is that really believable, or did Cro Magnon people simply arrive here at that time and begin replacing ALL hominids, gracile and otherwise? One thing scholars all agree on is that whatever caused Cro Magnon people to appear on this planet when they did was not gradual. Danny Vendramini ("Them and Us") notes:

The speed of the Upper Palaeolithic revolution in the Levant was also breathtaking. Anthropologists Ofer Bar-Yosef and Bernard Vandermeersch:

Between 40,000 and 45,000 years ago the material culture of western Eurasia changed more than it had during the previous million years. This efflorescence of technological and artistic creativity signifies the emergence of the first culture that observers today would recognise as distinctly human, marked as it was by unceasing invention and variety. During that brief period of 5,000 or so years, the stone tool kit, unchanged in its essential form for ages, suddenly began to differentiate wildly from century to century and from region to region. Why it happened and why it happened when it did constitute two of the greatest outstanding problems in paleoanthropology.

Likewise Dwardu Cardona ("Flare Star"):

Where and how the Cro-Magnons first arose remains unknown. Their appearance, however, coincided with the most bitter phase of the ice age. There is, however, no doubt that they were more advanced, more sophisticated, than the Neanderthals with whom they shared the land. Living in larger and more organized groups than had earlier humans, Cro Magnon peoples spread out until they populated most of the world. Their tools, made of bone, stone, and even wood, were carved into harpoons, awls, and fish hooks. They were presumably able hunters although, as with the Neanderthals, they would also have foraged to gather edible plants, roots, and wild vegetables. The only problem here is that,as far as can be told, the Cro Magnons seem to have arrived on the scene without leaving a single trace of their evolutionary ancestors.

'When the first Cro Magnons arrived in Europe some 40,000 years ago', Ian Tattersall observed, 'they evidently brought with them more or less the entire panoply of behaviors that distinguishes modern humans from every other species that has ever existed.'"

All of that is consistent with thinking that Cro Magnon man CAME to this planet 45,000 years ago or however long ago that was, and it is not consistent with thinking that man evolved from hominids.

In fact the huge eyes of the oldest groups of creatures on this planet, including dinosaurs and hominids, indicate that this planet was originally an exceedingly dark sort of place. Humans, with the smallest eyes relative to body size of advanced creatures could not have come from such a place.

Those were the kinds of eyes you needed when "darkness was upon the face of the deep"...

Cro Magnons and their descendants are one of what I'd view as the two basic human groups, the other being the familliar antediluvian people of the Bible. The difference has nothing to do with race or color, either group is capable of producing any color or feature you'd ever see in humans. Japanese Ainu, who most view as white, and Australian Aborigines who most view as black, are both Cro Magnon descendants.

The two groups are genetically identical or close enough to that to neglect the differences. They amount to separate saltations from the same source, separated by a large enough space of time that the two cultures and technologies were totally different.

If you wanted to believe that Adam and Eve were descended from Cro Magnons, there is a list of things which the Bible and Jewish literature would have to know about, and which they don't, which would include (at minimum):

Stone tools. Adam and Eve and their descendants were metal-tech people from day one (e.g., Genesis 4:22). By contrast, human groups descended from Cro-Magnons went on using stone tools until forced out of it by neighbors descended from Bible Antediluvians if they ever stopped at all. Aztecs were using stone knives and weapons when the Spanish arrived even though they used metals for ornaments and purposes other than tools.

The atlatl, the signature weapon of Cro Magnon people. Biblical accounts know nothing of this weapon; the weapons of the Bible were the sword, the spear, the sling, and the bow. By contrast, the Aztecs, a people descended from Cro-Magnons1, were using atlatls against the Spanish while native Australians continue to use it to hunt kangaroos today.

Neanderthals and/or other hominids. The Bible knows nothing of hominids. By contrast, the Basque "Basajuan" appears to be a reflection of the Neanderthal and the Australian "Yowie" appears to be some sort of hominid, which native Australians remember.

An upper Paleolithic world war in which all hominids were exterminated from the planet, or at least from the parts of the planet that humans inhabit in any numbers.

A primordial era generically referred to [by scholars who study myths and oral traditions] as the "Purple Dawn"; that is, a protracted age devoid of the daylight that we experience today.

Cro Magnon people experienced all of those things and their oral traditions more often than not show traces of them. The basic idea is that the two groups are from the same place, but their arrivals here were separated by thousands of years so that the culture and technology had totally changed by the time Adam and Eve and anybody else who may have come with them arrived.

There is no good word for the people prior to Adam and Eve. The term "Cro Magnon" has been declared a tabu word by scientists because nobody could figure out who all to include; the term "Pre-Adamite" is politically incorrect from being used in racist tracts 90 years ago; and the term "Early Modern Human" includes Skhul/Qafzeh hominids which, in real life, were still hominids and not humans.

All of this stuff is substantially at variance from 99% of what is taught in schools and also from what you'll find on normal Internet resources. Nonetheless, the stuff they teach plainly doesn't work. For a hominid to have ever evolved into a human, that hominid would need to have:

Lost his fur while ice-ages were going on.

Lost almost all of his sense of smell while trying to survive as a land prey animal [fatal]

Lost almost all of his night vision in an age when night was the only time of day that there was.

If that doesn't sound like a formula for success, then neither should the idea of God creating a creature for a world for which the creature was hideously maladapted. There is nothing in the Bible about God being STUPID.....

Cosmos in Collision does in fact describe the reasons for our planet having been super-dark in ancient times. Kindle is everybody's friend...

In it humans are from earth but were engineered or “uplifted” from chimp like ancestors several times by a race called the “Eolihim”. All the various previos “evolutions” of humans nthe fossil records are nothing more than failed attempts at engineering a race and supposedly we are the 7th iteration, where neadertals were the 6th and Homoe Erectus was the 5th etc... etc...

Any the Terestrial reptillians whioch are actually not reptiles as they supposedly derived from the therepod lines, ie.. Brids and pseudo-warm blooded dinosaurs.

And they are at war with some of the extraterrestial races which to confuse things also includes races of reptiles from other worlds....

I take all this with a grain of salt of course, maybe a large salt block, but I find crazy crap like this fascinating.

If I had to pick any one thing which standard theories do the least good job of explaining, it's the fact of Cro Magnon complex representational artwork being there from day one of their existence. There is zero evidence of any sort of hominid artwork on this planet and that by itself should eliminate the possibility of humans having evolved from hominids. All that really leaves is humans being created here, or arriving here from elsewhere.

If I had to pick any one thing which standard theories do the least good job of explaining, it's the fact of Cro Magnon complex representational artwork being there from day one of their existence. There is zero evidence of any sort of hominid artwork on this planet and that by itself should eliminate the possibility of humans having evolved from hominids. All that really leaves is humans being created here, or arriving here from elsewhere.

While everything tells me the Creator had 99% +/- to do with what we are today, evolution has, can, and will affect us in the future.

Because we have the ability to save those who would normally die off or never even survive birth, and can choose to kill those we don’t want born, we are interfering with the natural progression of evolution to a point were, IMO, there are more than just 2 sub-species developing but a handful and not all are going to be productive members of society.

Look at all the clans in the mid-east and how their adherence to an insane death cult has stopped ALMOST all of their evolution since that mad man pedophile created Islam.

Other what we have to call Cultures (to be politically correct) maybe actually be deviations in the evolutionary path and just like evolution does in nature not all deviations are positive. Some are much better and some are much worse yet with humans we can preserve those who might very well have never survived to procreate.

Regardless of ones stand on Creator vs Evolution, IMO, our man made interference is producing a multitude of sub-species and boy they are not all good.

Good thing they came to a planet with compatible proteins, and that they had all those other hominids with them to confuse modern researchers regarding similarities of DNA.

Too bad, back in 1947, we killed the rescue mission that was sent to find & succor the survivors. No; we are not related to the Greys; they are artificial constructs—androids—used for routine ‘grunt work’.

Our ancestors didn’t have any with them; and being rich white conservative playboys, just had to muddle along as best they could, with the raw materials and at hand, having lost all advanced tech when their ship crashed...or the Intergalactic Prisons Commission kicked them out, naked and tooless.

Ours do. They are always hunting UFOs: unseen furry objects, AKA invisible mice. Especially when nipped. Catnip seems too open their dimensional eyes, allowing them to see into the unseen realm, and keep its denizens at bay.

Nicknamedbob and I have kicked about some story ideas that shade rather close to the premise that humans were created here, as well as came here.
The idea hasn’t been fleshed out real well, we haven’t put much into adding to the rough bones of it.

What was going on in 1947 was mainly people still tooling around in piston-engined aircraft, seeing jets for the first time. What was going on several thousand years ago was a small star system (centered around a dwarf star) being captured by a larger system which included a main sequence star.

Cosmos in Collision seems to start with the idea that our solar system was originally in two parts and the logic seems compelling:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt

If our solar system had arisen in any sort of an organized way, particularly if the planets had formed up from swirling masses of solar material as per the usual claim, you'd expect the axes of the planets to be roughly perpendicular to the plane of the system. The sun, Jupiter, and Mercury do in fact show that. Uranus and Venus are special cases of sorts, but Neptune, Saturn, Earth, and Mars with their roughly 26-degree axis tilts pretty much have to be an original system of some sort which was captured, by our sun, as a group. At least that's the simplest explanation for it.

There's also a question as to why anybody ever worshiped Jupiter and/or Saturn. Primitives looking for something in the sky to worship today would end up worshiping the sun and the moon, but the two chieftain gods of every one of those old religions were Jupiter and Saturn, and particularly Saturn. The main Roman religious festival was "Saturnalia" and our sabbath is still called "Saturn's Day".

Plato consistently referred to antediluvians as "Nurselings of Kronos (Saturn),and Hesiod and Ovid both refer to the pre-flood era as an age "when Saturn/Kronos was "King of Heaven". In the same language, our sun is the "King of Heaven" now.

This one was the last ‘new’ fiction I’d read in 20+ years, had to track it down through the interlibrary loan system at that time, anyway, recommended to me by a FReeper in open thread. The author later wrote “Kicking the Sacred Cow” which favorably (and pretty accurately) reviews Velikovsky’s body of work, among other things, and bitch-slaps the global warming hoax. Alas, late in his life he got nutty and embraced 9/11 truthism and Holocaust denial.

James P. Hogan did the humans-are-from-elsewhere story up very nicely, thank you. Although he did have them coming from elsewhere in this same solar system.

It was complicated, in the Worlds in Collision, When Worlds Collide sense of the term.

I’m still working on the physics of moving planets from one orbit to another, so I’m not too sure about these contentions. When your history depends more on accident than on intentions, it doesn’t seem too convincing.

Our species has less genetic variety than is prudent, outward appearances notwithstanding, but the conventional explanations seem to handle that pretty well; Toba and that sort of thing. We also have DNA from other hominid groups including Neanderthal, (redheads, pay attention!)

I’d argue that we are not particularly well adapted for survival anywhere, much less a completely alien world with unknown fauna. Hogan had it right when he dubbed this planet the nightmare world. But we wouldn’t be better off anywhere else, and having to face anything more advanced than mushrooms.

What worked for us from the beginning, just as it permits our survival today, is our ability to cooperate, and to pass knowledge on to others. That is the change that came about, and allowed a loser species in the realm of nature red with fang and claw to not only survive, but to thrive.

32
posted on 08/19/2013 3:43:12 PM PDT
by NicknamedBob
(Modesty compels me to brag only about my modesty, at which I excel.)

Part of the story I’ve been pecking away at writing involves humans as genetically modified and spliced offspring of some other being.
And, of course, humans then themselves turn around later on and genetically splice and dice their own created “offspring.”
{Yes NNB, these would be the large twitch eared guys with carrot addiction.}

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.